"In other writings the Polish friar attempts to describe Mary's deep, intimate union with the Third Person of the Trinity from her conception, by calling Mary the "quasi-incarnation" of the Holy Spirit.13 He is careful to stress that this union "is not of the same order as the hypostatic union linking the human and divine natures in Christ";14 for he repeated often that the Holy Spirit does not dwell in Mary in the same way in which the Eternal Word is present in the sacred humanity of Jesus.15 The notion of the Holy Spirit becoming "in some manner" (quasi) incarnate in Mary may at first seem to be an extreme idea. However, it is somewhat analogous to the statement by St. Louis de Montfort, that "God the Son wishes to form himself, and in a manner of speaking, become incarnate every day in his members through his dear Mother."16 Along the same lines, St. Paul says: "It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me" (Gal. 2:20).

With the term "quasi-incarnation" Kolbe means that Mary is so much like (quasi) the Holy Spirit, in that she reflects the Third Person of the Trinity especially in two qualities or attributes: receptivity and fruitfulness. The Holy Spirit is the Fruit of the Father and the Son. He was "eternally conceived," if you will, as the Fruit of the all-pure love which has forever flowed between the Father and the Son. He receives the mutual love of the Father and the Son and eternally fructifies it within the inner life of the Trinity.17 Mary's sinlessness from conception is the fruit of God's love. At Mary's conception the Holy Spirit conformed her to himself. The Blessed Virgin, by reason of the singular grace of her Immaculate Conception, is totally receptive to the love of God. At the Annunciation she receives God's love and in cooperation with the Holy Spirit makes that love fruitful — infinitely so — in conceiving the Incarnate Word.18"

St. Maximilian Kolbe is one of my most favorite saints (amongst many favorite saints!) for a variety of reasons. However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter? He is, after all, a post-schism Western Catholic Saint. Personally, I find nothing wrong with the description of his teaching as far as I understand it, but then, I *am* Catholic .

What teaching(s) of Bulgakov are you seeking parallels to here? And, again, why would it matter to an Orthodox Christian?

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

Sophianism (from Greek Σοφια "wisdom") is a heresy which has been condemned by the Russian Orthodox Church. Sophianism has roots in Wisdom theology, nineteenth and twentieth century Russian theology, preeminently Sergius Bulgakov through the influence of Vladimir Solovyov. Russian Orthodox priest Georges Florovsky and Orthodox theologian Vladimir Lossky opposed the interjection of the deity Sophia. Lossky stated that it was a misguided uniting together of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary into a single deity or hypostasis of God.

Is there any streams of wisdom theology in RC circles that connect Mary and the person of Wisdom?

In the words [of Fr. Sergius Bulgakov], when the Holy Spirit came to dwell in the Virgin Mary, she acquired "a dyadic life, human and divine; that is, She was completely deified, because in Her hypostatic being was manifest the living, creative revelation of the Holy Spirit" (Archpriest Sergei Bulgakov, The Unburnt Bush, 1927, p. 154). "She is a perfect manifestation of the Third Hypostasis" (Ibid., p. 175), "a creature, but also no longer a creature" (P. 19 1)...

In the words [of Fr. Sergius Bulgakov], when the Holy Spirit came to dwell in the Virgin Mary, she acquired "a dyadic life, human and divine; that is, She was completely deified, because in Her hypostatic being was manifest the living, creative revelation of the Holy Spirit" (Archpriest Sergei Bulgakov, The Unburnt Bush, 1927, p. 154). "She is a perfect manifestation of the Third Hypostasis" (Ibid., p. 175), "a creature, but also no longer a creature" (P. 19 1)...

That seems to be a bit off-topic, since the thread is about St. Maximillan Kolbe's teachings.

In the words [of Fr. Sergius Bulgakov], when the Holy Spirit came to dwell in the Virgin Mary, she acquired "a dyadic life, human and divine; that is, She was completely deified, because in Her hypostatic being was manifest the living, creative revelation of the Holy Spirit" (Archpriest Sergei Bulgakov, The Unburnt Bush, 1927, p. 154). "She is a perfect manifestation of the Third Hypostasis" (Ibid., p. 175), "a creature, but also no longer a creature" (P. 19 1)...

That seems to be a bit off-topic, since the thread is about St. Maximillan Kolbe's teachings.

well, my second post was specifically to EO posters to see if they thought there was any similarity between the two teachings. Someone asked me about specifics regarding what he taught, so I provided them.

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

I see what St. Kolbe is trying to say. If one actually reads through the passage, it is not heterodox per se, but the term "quasi-incarnation" can be problemactic because it could lend itself to heterdox interpretations. I think St. Kolbe should have just dropped the term altogether, and instead, discussed the intimate relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Theotokos, on its own terms.

Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide. So, perhaps, it isn't.

Anyways, the belief mentioned in the OP is, at the very least, extremely disconcerting.

Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice. Can you guess what it is?

I honestly think there are a few points where the words of Kolbe, as presented in the article, are incompatible with Orthodox teaching.

Quote

And who is the Holy Spirit? The flowering of the love of the Father and the Son. If the fruit of created love is a created conception, then the fruit of divine Love, that prototype of all created love, is necessarily a divine "conception." The Holy Spirit is, therefore, the "uncreated, eternal conception," the prototype of all the conceptions that multiply life throughout the whole universe.

This is obviously unacceptable because the Cappadocian fathers chose the term proceeds precisely to prevent this kind of thinking. The mode of origin is left vague because the Spirit's relation to the Father is not as clearly defined in scripture like the relationship between the Father and Son. The Spirit is not a conception.

Quote

[T]he Holy Spirit manifests his share in the word of Redemption through the Immaculate Virgin who, although she is a person entirely distinct from him, is so intimately associated with him that our minds cannot understand it. So, while their union is not of the same order as the hypostatic union linking the human and divine natures in Christ, it remains true to say that Mary's action is the very action of the Holy Spirit.

This is problematic because the last sentence in Orthodox thought is not unique to Mary. By virtue of having a personal relationship with the three persons of the Trinity, the divine energies of God are personalized (enhypostasized) in the saints by grace, which is a sending from one divine person (the Holy Spirit) to a receiving human person. The statement itself is not unacceptable, but it is only acceptable with the reservation that the described relationship of union in action belongs properly to the entire communion of saints.

Quote

When we reflect on these two truths: that all graces come from the Father by the Son and the Holy Spirit; and that our Holy Mother Mary is, so to speak, one with the Holy Spirit, we are driven to the conclusion that this Most Holy Mother is indeed the intermediary by whom all graces come to us.

This is simply not conceivable in Orthodoxy. The Theotokos is the mediator of grace in relation to her bringing Christ into the world. To say that she serves as the intermediary by whom all graces flow undermines the teaching that grace comes by virtue of a personal relationship (communion) with the Holy Trinity.

« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 09:08:20 AM by Cavaradossi »

Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide.

That seems very strange.

If, say, a Buddhist was martyred for being a Buddhist, that obviously wouldn't be equivalent to Christian martyrdom; but to call it suicide? That doesn't make sense.

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

Since when does one *need* an icon or relics to venerate a saint? Are we, whether Orthodox or Catholic, not free to venerate privately and ask for the prayers and intercessions of any saint, irregardless of whether we possess an icon or relics? After all, it is God Who makes the saints, not man or the Church. The Church acknowledges, through the canonization process, that which God has already done. Well....at least that's my understanding, anway . I could be wrong .

As far as St. Maximilian Kolbe goes, my understanding (again, possibly faulty) is that as a Christian (and he was certainly that, even if he was one of those darned Catholics) he was canonized far more out of recognition of what he did in Auschwitz than for his Mariology. Does the fact that he wasn't "Orthodox" disqualify him for sainthood?

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide.

That seems very strange.

If, say, a Buddhist was martyred for being a Buddhist, that obviously wouldn't be equivalent to Christian martyrdom; but to call it suicide? That doesn't make sense.

Strange, indeed!

John 15:12-13--"This is my commandment, that you love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love than this no man hath, that a man lay down his life for his friends."

How could St. Kolbe giving his life, under these circumstances, be even remotely considered to be suicide?? To think thus is, if I might say so, highly disrespectful, to say the least.

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

Since when does one *need* an icon or relics to venerate a saint? Are we, whether Orthodox or Catholic, not free to venerate privately and ask for the prayers and intercessions of any saint, irregardless of whether we possess an icon or relics? After all, it is God Who makes the saints, not man or the Church. The Church acknowledges, through the canonization process, that which God has already done. Well....at least that's my understanding, anway . I could be wrong .

As far as St. Maximilian Kolbe goes, my understanding (again, possibly faulty) is that as a Christian (and he was certainly that, even if he was one of those darned Catholics) he was canonized far more out of recognition of what he did in Auschwitz than for his Mariology. Does the fact that he wasn't "Orthodox" disqualify him for sainthood?

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

Since when does one *need* an icon or relics to venerate a saint? Are we, whether Orthodox or Catholic, not free to venerate privately and ask for the prayers and intercessions of any saint, irregardless of whether we possess an icon or relics? After all, it is God Who makes the saints, not man or the Church. The Church acknowledges, through the canonization process, that which God has already done. Well....at least that's my understanding, anway . I could be wrong .

As far as St. Maximilian Kolbe goes, my understanding (again, possibly faulty) is that as a Christian (and he was certainly that, even if he was one of those darned Catholics) he was canonized far more out of recognition of what he did in Auschwitz than for his Mariology. Does the fact that he wasn't "Orthodox" disqualify him for sainthood?

how many post schism EO's does the RC declare as saints?

I've no idea, really.

How many saints are there, Catholic and/or Orthodox, that have never been "officially" recognized as such, i.e. canonized?

« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 02:54:07 PM by J Michael »

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

Since when does one *need* an icon or relics to venerate a saint? Are we, whether Orthodox or Catholic, not free to venerate privately and ask for the prayers and intercessions of any saint, irregardless of whether we possess an icon or relics? After all, it is God Who makes the saints, not man or the Church. The Church acknowledges, through the canonization process, that which God has already done. Well....at least that's my understanding, anway . I could be wrong .

As far as St. Maximilian Kolbe goes, my understanding (again, possibly faulty) is that as a Christian (and he was certainly that, even if he was one of those darned Catholics) he was canonized far more out of recognition of what he did in Auschwitz than for his Mariology. Does the fact that he wasn't "Orthodox" disqualify him for sainthood?

how many post schism EO's does the RC declare as saints?

I've no idea, really.

How many saints are there, Catholic and/or Orthodox, that have never been "officially" recognized as such, i.e. canonized?

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

Since when does one *need* an icon or relics to venerate a saint? Are we, whether Orthodox or Catholic, not free to venerate privately and ask for the prayers and intercessions of any saint, irregardless of whether we possess an icon or relics? After all, it is God Who makes the saints, not man or the Church. The Church acknowledges, through the canonization process, that which God has already done. Well....at least that's my understanding, anway . I could be wrong .

As far as St. Maximilian Kolbe goes, my understanding (again, possibly faulty) is that as a Christian (and he was certainly that, even if he was one of those darned Catholics) he was canonized far more out of recognition of what he did in Auschwitz than for his Mariology. Does the fact that he wasn't "Orthodox" disqualify him for sainthood?

how many post schism EO's does the RC declare as saints?

Why do you ask?

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide. So, perhaps, it isn't.

Wow. Maybe you're holy enough to judge someone who was willing to die for another during the Holocaust and say his act was worthless, but I know I'm not.

Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide. So, perhaps, it isn't.

Wow. Maybe you're holy enough to judge someone who was willing to die for another during the Holocaust and say his act was worthless, but I know I'm not.

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide. So, perhaps, it isn't.

Please supply some references that confirm your contention. And then, please show us how ST. Maximilian Kolbe was not "part of the Church". And then, please explain to us how his voluntarily dying in order to save the life of another (who, in fact, did survive the war) was "suicide". And then, please explain how his actions were contrary to John 15:12-13. Thanks!

« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 06:11:19 PM by J Michael »

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

I honestly think there are a few points where the words of Kolbe, as presented in the article, are incompatible with Orthodox teaching.

Quote

And who is the Holy Spirit? The flowering of the love of the Father and the Son. If the fruit of created love is a created conception, then the fruit of divine Love, that prototype of all created love, is necessarily a divine "conception." The Holy Spirit is, therefore, the "uncreated, eternal conception," the prototype of all the conceptions that multiply life throughout the whole universe.

This is obviously unacceptable because the Cappadocian fathers chose the term proceeds precisely to prevent this kind of thinking. The mode of origin is left vague because the Spirit's relation to the Father is not as clearly defined in scripture like the relationship between the Father and Son. The Spirit is not a conception.

One point of clarification (or maybe just emphasis)--the term proceeds was actually 'chosen' by Christ. The Cappadocian Fathers choice was to stick to what had been revealed rather than engaging in unfounded speculation about the unknowable.

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

Since when does one *need* an icon or relics to venerate a saint? Are we, whether Orthodox or Catholic, not free to venerate privately and ask for the prayers and intercessions of any saint, irregardless of whether we possess an icon or relics? After all, it is God Who makes the saints, not man or the Church. The Church acknowledges, through the canonization process, that which God has already done. Well....at least that's my understanding, anway . I could be wrong .

As far as St. Maximilian Kolbe goes, my understanding (again, possibly faulty) is that as a Christian (and he was certainly that, even if he was one of those darned Catholics) he was canonized far more out of recognition of what he did in Auschwitz than for his Mariology. Does the fact that he wasn't "Orthodox" disqualify him for sainthood?

how many post schism EO's does the RC declare as saints?

Well, I know that Byzantine Catholic Churches commemorate St. Gregory Palamas and St. Seraphim of Serov, to name two.

Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.

I honestly think there are a few points where the words of Kolbe, as presented in the article, are incompatible with Orthodox teaching.

Quote

And who is the Holy Spirit? The flowering of the love of the Father and the Son. If the fruit of created love is a created conception, then the fruit of divine Love, that prototype of all created love, is necessarily a divine "conception." The Holy Spirit is, therefore, the "uncreated, eternal conception," the prototype of all the conceptions that multiply life throughout the whole universe.

This is obviously unacceptable because the Cappadocian fathers chose the term proceeds precisely to prevent this kind of thinking. The mode of origin is left vague because the Spirit's relation to the Father is not as clearly defined in scripture like the relationship between the Father and Son. The Spirit is not a conception.

One point of clarification (or maybe just emphasis)--the term proceeds was actually 'chosen' by Christ. The Cappadocian Fathers choice was to stick to what had been revealed rather than engaging in unfounded speculation about the unknowable.

Sort of, but the idea I was trying to get across was that the Cappadocian Fathers were the first, if I am remembering correctly, to use proceeds as an analogue of sorts to begotten as signifying having origin from the Father (that is that the Cappadocian Fathers in stressing the divinity of the Spirit were the first to assign a term to describe the Spirit's eternal manner of origin from the Father). We have them to thank for the phrase from the Creed of Constantinople which states that the Spirit 'proceeds from the Father', which was not present in the Creed of Nicaea.

Divorced from this particular theological context, ἐκπορευόμενον seems to be a rather vague term. It is also used, for example, to describe the river of the water of life flowing from the throne of the Father and the Lamb in Revelations 22:1.

« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 07:13:41 PM by Cavaradossi »

Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

And then, please show us how ST. Maximilian Kolbe was not "part of the Church".

That's the easy one.

Oh boy....here we go....yet again.

It's you who made that stupid request ;P

If you noticed, the request was part of a string of connected requests. Care to address the others as well, since you already started?

In anticipation of your (hopefully intelligent) answer, St. Maximilian Kolbe was most definitely a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope. We are in what is called, by us, an imperfect communion with the Orthodox Churches. If you or others wish to totally dissociate yourselves from us, and deny that we, along with our saints, including St. Kolbe, are indeed "part of the Church", that is your right. God gave you free will. It is also your inestimable loss. It is our loss, too, unfortunately.

Hopefully that will be all that has to be said about that.

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

In anticipation of your (hopefully intelligent) answer, St. Maximilian Kolbe was most definitely a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope. We are in what is called, by us, an imperfect communion with the Orthodox Churches. If you or others wish to totally dissociate yourselves from us, and deny that we, along with our saints, including St. Kolbe, are indeed "part of the Church", that is your right. God gave you free will. It is also your inestimable loss. It is our loss, too, unfortunately.

And what have you accomplished with writing that? What meaningful does it bring into the discussion?

And then, please show us how ST. Maximilian Kolbe was not "part of the Church".

That's the easy one.

Oh boy....here we go....yet again.

It's you who made that stupid request ;P

In anticipation of your (hopefully intelligent) answer, St. Maximilian Kolbe was most definitely a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope.

You know that Orthodox do not believe the second sentence. And that, accordingly, you've demonstrated Michael's point, that it's easy to show that Kolbe was "not part of the Church" according to Orthodox teaching. You just did it yourself.

Quote

Hopefully that will be all that has to be said about that.

This is the Orthodox-Catholic discussion subforum of an Orthodox forum. Quite obviously, every time you dispute Orthodox ecclesiology here you are going to get responses. I have no idea why you think it's useful to act surprised every time you take a thread off-track by doing so. If I was on an RC forum, I'd expect exactly the same level of responses every time I said, "the Papacy is in schism."

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great

In anticipation of your (hopefully intelligent) answer, St. Maximilian Kolbe was most definitely a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope. We are in what is called, by us, an imperfect communion with the Orthodox Churches. If you or others wish to totally dissociate yourselves from us, and deny that we, along with our saints, including St. Kolbe, are indeed "part of the Church", that is your right. God gave you free will. It is also your inestimable loss. It is our loss, too, unfortunately.

And what have you accomplished with writing that? What meaningful does it bring into the discussion?

Just trying to establish, against all odds on this board, that St. Maximilian Kolbe was "part of the Church" and to lament the fact that some (many? all?) Orthodox Christians like yourself seem to consider that we are not part of the same Church, although in different ways.

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

In anticipation of your (hopefully intelligent) answer, St. Maximilian Kolbe was most definitely a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope. We are in what is called, by us, an imperfect communion with the Orthodox Churches. If you or others wish to totally dissociate yourselves from us, and deny that we, along with our saints, including St. Kolbe, are indeed "part of the Church", that is your right. God gave you free will. It is also your inestimable loss. It is our loss, too, unfortunately.

And what have you accomplished with writing that? What meaningful does it bring into the discussion?

Just trying to establish, against all odds on this board, that St. Maximilian Kolbe was "part of the Church" and to lament the fact that some (many? all?) Orthodox Christians like yourself seem to consider that we are not part of the same Church, although in different ways.

And then, please show us how ST. Maximilian Kolbe was not "part of the Church".

That's the easy one.

Oh boy....here we go....yet again.

It's you who made that stupid request ;P

In anticipation of your (hopefully intelligent) answer, St. Maximilian Kolbe was most definitely a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope.

You know that Orthodox do not believe the second sentence. And that, accordingly, you've demonstrated Michael's point, that it's easy to show that Kolbe was "not part of the Church" according to Orthodox teaching. You just did it yourself.

Quote

Hopefully that will be all that has to be said about that.

This is the Orthodox-Catholic discussion subforum of an Orthodox forum. Quite obviously, every time you dispute Orthodox ecclesiology here you are going to get responses. I have no idea why you think it's useful to act surprised every time you take a thread off-track by doing so. If I was on an RC forum, I'd expect exactly the same level of responses every time I said, "the Papacy is in schism."

Everyone here, myself included, is well aware that Saint Kolbe was not an Orthodox Christian. It wasn't me, originally, who opened the door to this discussion. I was hoping it wouldn't happen and we wouldn't have to get back on this merry-go-round again. As a Catholic who is being graciously allowed to participate here, on the Orthodox-Catholic discussion subforum, I'm well aware that this is, indeed, an Orthodox board. When Catholic ecclesiology is challenged, do you expect me or other Catholics to sit idly by and not take up that challenge, to the best of our abilities--mine being pretty limited, admittedly?

I think it was Wyatt who commented on another thread about this subforum being nothing more than a place to troll Catholics. That entered my mind when this thread first started and prompted the reply that I initially wrote. Seems he may have been right.

It also seems that I'm a sucker for falling into the "trap", if you will, by even bothering to reply here. Guess I'll have to reassess whether I even want to participate any longer. It is Lent, after all, and I'm doing my best (which isn't very good sometimes) to resist the temptation to sin, so maybe I should include in my fasting regimen fasting (again) from this board. Pardon me for thinking out loud, and please forgive me if I've offended you or others here. I am, after all, a great sinner.

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

When your ecclesiology is not related to the ongoing discussion in any way?

Well, yes and no. Most of the discussion on this thread has been rooted in William's question of whether an Orthodox can venerate St. Maximilian; but the opening post (now largely forgotten) did actually ask for RC opinions on him.

When your ecclesiology is not related to the ongoing discussion in any way?

Well, yes and no. Most of the discussion on this thread has been rooted in William's question of whether an Orthodox can venerate St. Maximilian; but the opening post (now largely forgotten) did actually ask for RC opinions on him.

Thank you for that, Peter!

« Last Edit: March 02, 2012, 12:42:16 PM by J Michael »

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

I just want to inform everyone that I will not be replying to any replies to my previous post in this thread. It became rather clear to me, fairly quickly, that people have no intention of actually listening to anything I have to say on the matter, and will instead just repeatedly tell me I am wrong, regardless of what I actually say.

Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice. Can you guess what it is?

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide.

That seems very strange.

If, say, a Buddhist was martyred for being a Buddhist, that obviously wouldn't be equivalent to Christian martyrdom; but to call it suicide? That doesn't make sense.

Many Patristic phrases seem harsh or confusing like St. Athanasius of Alexandria saying that the baptism of heretics is a baptism into atheism.

Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt

If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.

Quote from: orthonorm

I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

I just want to inform everyone that I will not be replying to any replies to my previous post in this thread. It became rather clear to me, fairly quickly, that people have no intention of actually listening to anything I have to say on the matter, and will instead just repeatedly tell me I am wrong, regardless of what I actually say.

Happens a lot here.

Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt

If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.

Quote from: orthonorm

I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

I just want to inform everyone that I will not be replying to any replies to my previous post in this thread. It became rather clear to me, fairly quickly, that people have no intention of actually listening to anything I have to say on the matter, and will instead just repeatedly tell me I am wrong, regardless of what I actually say.

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

I'm not asking to put him on the calendar. I'm talking about private veneration. I've heard that veneration of post schism saints can be okay potentially if it's private.

I see what St. Kolbe is trying to say. If one actually reads through the passage, it is not heterodox per se, but the term "quasi-incarnation" can be problemactic because it could lend itself to heterdox interpretations. I think St. Kolbe should have just dropped the term altogether, and instead, discussed the intimate relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Theotokos, on its own terms.

Yeah, seems like he was trying to push the boundaries just for the sake of pushing the boundaries.

That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope. We are in what is called, by us, an imperfect communion with the Orthodox Churches. If you or others wish to totally dissociate yourselves from us, and deny that we, along with our saints, including St. Kolbe, are indeed "part of the Church", that is your right. God gave you free will. It is also your inestimable loss. It is our loss, too, unfortunately.

This is pretty obviously an unscriptural, untraditiona and unpatristic way of looking at ecclesiology.

I sympathize with you objecting to the absurd implication that what Kolbe did was suicide, but your assertion of ultramontane ecclesiology as something that everyone should accept by default on an Orthodox forum is extremely obnoxious.

I just want to inform everyone that I will not be replying to any replies to my previous post in this thread. It became rather clear to me, fairly quickly, that people have no intention of actually listening to anything I have to say on the matter, and will instead just repeatedly tell me I am wrong, regardless of what I actually say.

Pulling a Cartman? Sounds like a way of getting out of defending your ridiculous assertion. Thanks for not giving a single citation, by the way.

Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant

I sympathize with you objecting to the absurd implication that what Kolbe did was suicide, but your assertion of ultramontane ecclesiology as something that everyone should accept by default on an Orthodox forum is extremely obnoxious.

Where did I assert that "everyone should accept by default" an ultramontanist ecclesiology? I stated quite simply and clearly the known position of the Catholic Church vis-a-vis Orthodoxy, something which has been stated numerous times on this forum by multiple posters. My assertion, as you call it, is only that the Catholic Church is, along with Orthodoxy, part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. What I find extremely unfortunate, and hence a loss for all concerned, is that many Orthodox choose to totally deny us that position and to have nothing to do with us, other, perhaps, than to condemn, berate, and belittle us. Everyone, I believe, loses in that situation. If you find that an "obnoxious" position, so be it.

It is not only an "absurd implication" that Saint Kolbe committed suicide, but equally if not more obnoxious to me that you and others repeatedly omit the honorific "Saint" when referring to him. Probably as disrespectful and obnoxious as if I or other Catholics were to refer to St. Maria Skobtsova simply as "Skobtsova". Look at it this way, if the Catholic Church refused to recognize that Orthodoxy is part of "the Church", I could (but wouldn't simply out of basic respect) assert that St. Maria Skobtsova was just "Skobtsova", a mad woman who committed suicide during the Holocaust. Somehow I don't think that would go down very well, don't you?

« Last Edit: March 03, 2012, 01:48:32 PM by J Michael »

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

Yeah, I figured you were talking about Militia Immaculata; however, the link you gave doesn't say that their main goal is "to proselytize sinners, heretics and schismatics".

Have you opened it?

Quote

The purpose of the Knights is contained in these words: to do all you can for the conversion of sinners, heretics, schismatics and so on

I don't think they identify Orthodox Christians as either heretics or schismatics, do they? Besides, if you are strong enough and secure enough in your faith, I'd think you'd have nothing to worry about, even if they did.

« Last Edit: March 03, 2012, 02:44:47 PM by J Michael »

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

Why would you venerate a man who started an organisation which main goal is "to proselytize sinners, heretics and schismatics" (what means us).

If you'll forgive me for butting into an intra-Orthodox conversation, I think it needs to be kept in mind that this was before Vatican II (FWIW).

I'm actually not so sure it does make a difference, at least in the way I had in mind. After all, Vatican II tells us:

Quote

... We believe that this unity subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time.

However, it is evident that, when individuals wish for full Catholic communion, their preparation and reconciliation is an undertaking which of its nature is distinct from ecumenical action. But there is no opposition between the two, since both proceed from the marvelous ways of God.

Why would you venerate a man who started an organisation which main goal is "to proselytize sinners, heretics and schismatics" (what means us).

If you'll forgive me for butting into an intra-Orthodox conversation, I think it needs to be kept in mind that this was before Vatican II (FWIW).

Just as a point of information, mainly for Michal Kalina, St. Maximilian Kolbe was canonized as a *martyr*, totally apart from any efforts to proselytize "sinners, heretics, and schismatics".

If I recall, that caused some controversy, because his death was not caused by hatred of the faith but from an act of his own charity, hence his unofficial designation as a martyr of charity.

Laying one's life down for another is truly noble, but it falls short of martyrdom as it would traditionally be defined (dying for faith in Christ). The Roman Catholic Church is, of course, free to redefine her terminology as much as she wants, but I just thought it would be worth pointing out that if this were an Orthodox man, he would probably be canonized as 'passion-bearer' or something similar.

Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

I don't think they identify Orthodox Christians as either heretics or schismatics, do they? Besides, if you are strong enough and secure enough in your faith, I'd think you'd have nothing to worry about, even if they did.

Laying one's life down for another is truly noble, but it falls short of martyrdom as it would traditionally be defined (dying for faith in Christ). The Roman Catholic Church is, of course, free to redefine her terminology as much as she wants, but I just thought it would be worth pointing out that if this were an Orthodox man, he would probably be canonized as 'passion-bearer' or something similar.

"Passion-bearer" is a Russian thing. I know about several real Saints that died in a similar way and are described by the Church as martyrs because they weren't canonised by the Church of Russia.

I don't think they identify Orthodox Christians as either heretics or schismatics, do they?

Perhaps you're thinking of "Catholic Answers". I've lost count of how many different posters on their forum this week have said that Catholicism and Orthodox are the same, or that "The filioque and the Immaculate Conception are from what I read just differences in theology from East and West." (And yes, I have asked them what "just differences in theology" means, but I haven't gotten much of an answer.)

I don't think they identify Orthodox Christians as either heretics or schismatics, do they? Besides, if you are strong enough and secure enough in your faith, I'd think you'd have nothing to worry about, even if they did.

Uh... I don't think so. Why would he? If you read the article about him it states quite clearly that he was canonized as a martyr, a martyr of charity. Now, whether the beliefs of his you mention played a part in it, I really don't know. The fact of the matter is that he *was* canonized, and he *is* a saint. If St. Kolbe believed that Orthodox were heretics and/or schismatics, so be it. Doesn't bother me in the least, really. He was as entitled to his beliefs as you are to yours. None of that changes the fact of his sainthood. You are not required, obligated, or even asked to venerate him or ask for his prayers. Personally, it matters not a whit to me who you venerate. I would only ask that you give him the same minimum of respect that you might want a Catholic to give to say, St. Maria Skobtsova. That's all. I really don't think that's asking too much. I realize, of course, that others may think it is. Oh well.....

Whether one calls St. Kolbe a passion-bearer or martyr of charity or just plain martyr changes nothing.

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

I don't think they identify Orthodox Christians as either heretics or schismatics, do they?

Perhaps you're thinking of "Catholic Answers". I've lost count of how many different posters on their forum this week have said that Catholicism and Orthodox are the same, or that "The filioque and the Immaculate Conception are from what I read just differences in theology from East and West." (And yes, I have asked them what "just differences in theology" means, but I haven't gotten much of an answer.)

Actually, I wasn't. But I'd venture to guess that the opinions on CAF are about as (un) representative of Catholics as a whole as the opinions of Orthodox here are as (un) representative of Orthodox as a whole. But, that's just a guess, of course .

And you know what....some of those posters there *may* just be correct. Without knowing what was said and the context the posts, it's really impossible to tell. Nor does it matter for this discussion.

My point in what you quoted above was that the Militia Immaculata, as far as I can determine, doesn't identify Orthodox as heretics or schismatics. In fact, I don't think they give Orthodox a second thought at all. Or even a first thought, for that matter. And, so far, we only have Michal Kalina's word for it that St. Kolbe himself may have thought otherwise. If he did, that doesn't make him wrong. Nor does it make him right. Nor, especially, does it undo his actions at Auschwitz for which he was ultimately canonized.

« Last Edit: March 03, 2012, 09:35:35 PM by J Michael »

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

J Michael, this is Google Translate's version of the second half of the article:

And if those who were not Catholic? - Second lady interjected. - I for one am Orthodox.

- Then we must dig deeper. All men are brothers, and even the Orthodox Church that same worship Christ the Lord. There could, however, say that religion is the religion of the Orthodox Church, which Christ the Lord founded.

- And why not?

- Because the truth is only one. "Yes" and "no", can not be together right. Well, we say that the Holy Father is the visible head of the Church of Christ, Orthodox but they deny. They can not be both true sentence.

- Serve abolished.

- Well, Christ the Lord knew that there will be different apostasy and gave a clear standard, after which we can know His Church. Addressing itself to St. Peter said: "You are the rock, and upon this rock I will build my Church." Its so the Church is the one on this rock to support, and the successors of St. Peter is not the Russian tsars, but the Popes.

It is not a particularly good translation, but I think the point comes across fairly clearly.

Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice. Can you guess what it is?

Uh... I don't think so. Why would he? If you read the article about him it states quite clearly that he was canonized as a martyr, a martyr of charity. Now, whether the beliefs of his you mention played a part in it, I really don't know. The fact of the matter is that he *was* canonized, and he *is* a saint.

My point in what you quoted above was that the Militia Immaculata, as far as I can determine, doesn't identify Orthodox as heretics or schismatics. In fact, I don't think they give Orthodox a second thought at all.

Are we talking about his beliefs or about the current beliefs of the organisation he started?

Uh... I don't think so. Why would he? If you read the article about him it states quite clearly that he was canonized as a martyr, a martyr of charity. Now, whether the beliefs of his you mention played a part in it, I really don't know. The fact of the matter is that he *was* canonized, and he *is* a saint.

My point in what you quoted above was that the Militia Immaculata, as far as I can determine, doesn't identify Orthodox as heretics or schismatics. In fact, I don't think they give Orthodox a second thought at all.

Are we talking about his beliefs or about the current beliefs of the organisation he started?

I wasn't aware that he was anti-semitic. Please cite a source for that. I dislike anti-semitism wherever it comes from--as a Jewish person. And as a Christian. Whether he was or wasn't has no bearing on the fact of his sainthood and why he was canonized.

I wonder just how many Orthodox saints ever expressed anti-semitic opinions? See, for example, this about St. Nickolai Vleimirovic: Anti-semitism

Some of Velimirović's writings are viewed as anti-semitic.[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] He has been criticized for his writings in the book "Through the Prison Window" written while he was a prisoner in the Dachau concentration camp:

“[Europe] is presently the main battlefield of the Jew and his father, the devil, against the heavenly Father and his only begotten Son. […] [Jews] first need to become legally equal with Christians in order to repress Christianity next, turn Christians into faithless, and step on their necks. All the modern European slogans have been made up by Jews, the crucifiers of Christ: democracy, strikes, socialism, atheism, tolerance of all faiths, pacifism, universal revolution, capitalism and communism… All of these are invention of the Jews and their father , the Devil.[19]

According to the social psychologist Jovan Byford, similar and although less violent remarks can be found in New Speeches under the Mountain, The Ohrid Prologue or Indian Letters[20][21][22]

In his "Through the Prison Window", he was puzzled why the Europeans showed so much tolerance to the Jews and could not see through their "ploys". He also criticized European scientific achievements in the field of particle physics for being anti-Christian and possibly introduced by Jews. Further, he criticized the "mania for cleanliness" as being introduced by the Jews.[23]

Despite the Anti-Semitism accusations, it is recorded that he protected and helped escape from Nazi-occupied Serbia one Jewish family. Ela Trifunović, born Neuheus, wrote to the Serbian Orthodox Church in 2001, claiming that she had spent 18 months hiding in Ljubostinja monastery where she was smuggled by Velimirović, guarded and later helped move on with false papers.[24]"

Uh... I don't think so. Why would he? If you read the article about him it states quite clearly that he was canonized as a martyr, a martyr of charity. Now, whether the beliefs of his you mention played a part in it, I really don't know. The fact of the matter is that he *was* canonized, and he *is* a saint.

My point in what you quoted above was that the Militia Immaculata, as far as I can determine, doesn't identify Orthodox as heretics or schismatics. In fact, I don't think they give Orthodox a second thought at all.

Are we talking about his beliefs or about the current beliefs of the organisation he started?

This is from the article you linked: "Kolbe was a militant Catholic, anti-liberal, anti-secular and anti-Masonic, and opposed anybody, Jew or Gentile, whom he saw as a proponentof secularism. He was ex officio responsible, as head of Niepokalanow,for its publications, which contained, to a varying degree, anti-Semiticmaterials. "Maly Dziennik," a daily paper, popular, with the greatestcirculation, without question published anti-Semitic drivel.

It's difficult not to conclude that Father Kolbe failed in his responsi-bility adequately to oversee the publications of his monastery. In that,he was the man of his time and place.

But it is not possible to identify him with such clearly anti-Semiticclergymen such as, e. g., Monsignors Trzeciak and Charszewski.If by an anti-Semite one means someone who is against all Jews merelybecause they are Jews, then Father Kolbe was not an anti-Semite."

« Last Edit: March 04, 2012, 12:41:09 PM by J Michael »

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

During this holy season of the fast, I am trying to refrain from posting. However, the tone and tenor of this thread has me particularly distressed and I feel compelled to comment. One thing I do agree with here is the assertion that neither this forum, nor CAF, are accurate representations of the views of most adherents to either Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism with respect to each other.

When we start getting into the area of 'my saint is saintlier than your saint', I have a problem. There is little doubt that St. Maximillian Kolbe was canonized for his role in laying down his life for another rather than for any particular teaching or organization he may, or may not, have espoused in his lifetime. Certainly, an analogy may be drawn between that and the glorification of the last Tsar - as I understand it, his glorification in many ways comes from how he led his life after abdication and in the manner of his grisly death - not for the acts as Tsar within his lifetime. (Certainly his glorification is not without critics within Orthodoxy.) I leave those judgments to God - not the internets.

On a personal level, I am related from my paternal grandmother's side of the family to Blessed Pavel (Goidich) who died in a Slovak prison rather than submit to the Communist state's forced liquidation of the Greek Catholic Church. From studying his life, and understanding the tortured history of his people on both sides of the Atlantic, I have little personal doubt of the value of his life, the value of his death and his status in the eyes of the Lord. That doesn't mean that we should be glorifying him in the Orthodox sense as he was surely not Orthodox - however, that fact doesn't diminish or lessen the Christian life and death that he led. As for me, I have little doubt that Blessed Pavel seeks the intercession of Christ and his Blessed Mother for the protection of his people here on earth and for the preservation of their Eastern Christianity and for the unity of the Faith. If that is veneration - so be it. No apology here.

It is not only an "absurd implication" that Saint Kolbe committed suicide, but equally if not more obnoxious to me that you and others repeatedly omit the honorific "Saint" when referring to him. Probably as disrespectful and obnoxious as if I or other Catholics were to refer to St. Maria Skobtsova simply as "Skobtsova". Look at it this way, if the Catholic Church refused to recognize that Orthodoxy is part of "the Church", I could (but wouldn't simply out of basic respect) assert that St. Maria Skobtsova was just "Skobtsova", a mad woman who committed suicide during the Holocaust. Somehow I don't think that would go down very well, don't you?

I'm not asserting that Kolbe committed suicide or that he was mad by not putting two letters in front of his name. I'm just expressing the fact that I don't know his standing with the Lord. I do not hold Roman Catholic canonizations to be authoritative.

I wouldn't think it obnoxious if you referred to St. Maria as "Skobtsova." I would find it very obnoxious if you said something like "Saint" Maria Skobtsova with the quotation marks indicating sarcasm like a coreligionist of yours did in referring to St. John Maximatovitch.

Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant

Are we talking about his beliefs or about the current beliefs of the organisation he started?

No reason we can't be talking about both.

But the suggestion I'd make at this point is that, since it was William who asked whether it'd be proper to privately venerate St. Maximilian, we should ask him whether or not he wants more answers to that question.

But the suggestion I'd make at this point is that, since it was William who asked whether it'd be proper to privately venerate St. Maximilian, we should ask him whether or not he wants more answers to that question.

I'll ask my priest if I get a chance and it seems pertinent. I don't want to stir the pot anymore in this thread.

Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant

But the suggestion I'd make at this point is that, since it was William who asked whether it'd be proper to privately venerate St. Maximilian, we should ask him whether or not he wants more answers to that question.

I'll ask my priest if I get a chance and it seems pertinent. I don't want to stir the pot anymore in this thread.

That seems like the best way to deal with the issue, rather than relying on us hard-nosed and sometimes oversensitive amateurs .

Personally, I've really had enough of this thread and agree with podkarpatska's post above. I shall continue to venerate St. Maximilian and ask for his prayers. My Orthodox brothers and sisters may, of course, do what they like, in accordance with their ecclesiology and theology. Far be it from me to criticize them or their choices of saints to venerate and ask for intercessory prayers from.

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

But the suggestion I'd make at this point is that, since it was William who asked whether it'd be proper to privately venerate St. Maximilian, we should ask him whether or not he wants more answers to that question.

I'll ask my priest if I get a chance and it seems pertinent. I don't want to stir the pot anymore in this thread.

At various times and in various trials the most Blessed Virgin Mary has come to the aid of her children, giving them different ways of attaining salvation more easily, and freeing others from the yoke of satan. Now in this epoch of the Immaculate Conception the most Blessed Virgin has given mankind the "Miraculous Medal". Its heavenly origin has been proven by countless miracles of healing and particularly of conversion. The Immaculata herself in revealing it promised all who would wear it very many graces; and since conversion and sanctification are divine graces from God, the Miraculous Medal will be one of the best means for attaining these gifts. For this reason it constitutes a first-class weapon of the Militia Immaculatae; it is a "bullet" which a faithful Knight of the Immaculata aims at the enemy, i.e., evil, thereby saving persons caught in evil. "And above all the Miraculous Medal" (- original Program or Charter of the MI).

At various times and in various trials the most Blessed Virgin Mary has come to the aid of her children, giving them different ways of attaining salvation more easily, and freeing others from the yoke of satan. Now in this epoch of the Immaculate Conception the most Blessed Virgin has given mankind the "Miraculous Medal". Its heavenly origin has been proven by countless miracles of healing and particularly of conversion. The Immaculata herself in revealing it promised all who would wear it very many graces; and since conversion and sanctification are divine graces from God, the Miraculous Medal will be one of the best means for attaining these gifts. For this reason it constitutes a first-class weapon of the Militia Immaculatae; it is a "bullet" which a faithful Knight of the Immaculata aims at the enemy, i.e., evil, thereby saving persons caught in evil. "And above all the Miraculous Medal" (- original Program or Charter of the MI).

Give me your address--I'll send you one...free of charge.

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

At various times and in various trials the most Blessed Virgin Mary has come to the aid of her children, giving them different ways of attaining salvation more easily, and freeing others from the yoke of satan. Now in this epoch of the Immaculate Conception the most Blessed Virgin has given mankind the "Miraculous Medal". Its heavenly origin has been proven by countless miracles of healing and particularly of conversion. The Immaculata herself in revealing it promised all who would wear it very many graces; and since conversion and sanctification are divine graces from God, the Miraculous Medal will be one of the best means for attaining these gifts. For this reason it constitutes a first-class weapon of the Militia Immaculatae; it is a "bullet" which a faithful Knight of the Immaculata aims at the enemy, i.e., evil, thereby saving persons caught in evil. "And above all the Miraculous Medal" (- original Program or Charter of the MI).

At various times and in various trials the most Blessed Virgin Mary has come to the aid of her children, giving them different ways of attaining salvation more easily, and freeing others from the yoke of satan. Now in this epoch of the Immaculate Conception the most Blessed Virgin has given mankind the "Miraculous Medal". Its heavenly origin has been proven by countless miracles of healing and particularly of conversion. The Immaculata herself in revealing it promised all who would wear it very many graces; and since conversion and sanctification are divine graces from God, the Miraculous Medal will be one of the best means for attaining these gifts. For this reason it constitutes a first-class weapon of the Militia Immaculatae; it is a "bullet" which a faithful Knight of the Immaculata aims at the enemy, i.e., evil, thereby saving persons caught in evil. "And above all the Miraculous Medal" (- original Program or Charter of the MI).

Give me your address--I'll send you one...free of charge.

i'll check with my bishop and get back to you on that...

You need to ask him what your address is ? Oy vey!!!!

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire. May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

At various times and in various trials the most Blessed Virgin Mary has come to the aid of her children, giving them different ways of attaining salvation more easily, and freeing others from the yoke of satan. Now in this epoch of the Immaculate Conception the most Blessed Virgin has given mankind the "Miraculous Medal". Its heavenly origin has been proven by countless miracles of healing and particularly of conversion. The Immaculata herself in revealing it promised all who would wear it very many graces; and since conversion and sanctification are divine graces from God, the Miraculous Medal will be one of the best means for attaining these gifts. For this reason it constitutes a first-class weapon of the Militia Immaculatae; it is a "bullet" which a faithful Knight of the Immaculata aims at the enemy, i.e., evil, thereby saving persons caught in evil. "And above all the Miraculous Medal" (- original Program or Charter of the MI).

Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm

if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

At various times and in various trials the most Blessed Virgin Mary has come to the aid of her children, giving them different ways of attaining salvation more easily, and freeing others from the yoke of satan. Now in this epoch of the Immaculate Conception the most Blessed Virgin has given mankind the "Miraculous Medal". Its heavenly origin has been proven by countless miracles of healing and particularly of conversion. The Immaculata herself in revealing it promised all who would wear it very many graces; and since conversion and sanctification are divine graces from God, the Miraculous Medal will be one of the best means for attaining these gifts. For this reason it constitutes a first-class weapon of the Militia Immaculatae; it is a "bullet" which a faithful Knight of the Immaculata aims at the enemy, i.e., evil, thereby saving persons caught in evil. "And above all the Miraculous Medal" (- original Program or Charter of the MI).

Would I get bonus graces by owning two or three medals? One would be ill-prepared for a real gunfight by walking around with a gun that has only one bullet, after all.

« Last Edit: March 13, 2012, 06:26:07 PM by Cavaradossi »

Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

At various times and in various trials the most Blessed Virgin Mary has come to the aid of her children, giving them different ways of attaining salvation more easily, and freeing others from the yoke of satan. Now in this epoch of the Immaculate Conception the most Blessed Virgin has given mankind the "Miraculous Medal". Its heavenly origin has been proven by countless miracles of healing and particularly of conversion. The Immaculata herself in revealing it promised all who would wear it very many graces; and since conversion and sanctification are divine graces from God, the Miraculous Medal will be one of the best means for attaining these gifts. For this reason it constitutes a first-class weapon of the Militia Immaculatae; it is a "bullet" which a faithful Knight of the Immaculata aims at the enemy, i.e., evil, thereby saving persons caught in evil. "And above all the Miraculous Medal" (- original Program or Charter of the MI).

Would I get bonus graces by owning two or three medals? One would be ill-prepared for a real gunfight by walking around with a gun that has only one bullet, after all.

I don't think the effects stack. It's like eating the shroom in super mario brothers twice; it doesn't do anything the second time.

« Last Edit: March 13, 2012, 07:05:13 PM by NicholasMyra »

Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm

if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

At various times and in various trials the most Blessed Virgin Mary has come to the aid of her children, giving them different ways of attaining salvation more easily, and freeing others from the yoke of satan. Now in this epoch of the Immaculate Conception the most Blessed Virgin has given mankind the "Miraculous Medal". Its heavenly origin has been proven by countless miracles of healing and particularly of conversion. The Immaculata herself in revealing it promised all who would wear it very many graces; and since conversion and sanctification are divine graces from God, the Miraculous Medal will be one of the best means for attaining these gifts. For this reason it constitutes a first-class weapon of the Militia Immaculatae; it is a "bullet" which a faithful Knight of the Immaculata aims at the enemy, i.e., evil, thereby saving persons caught in evil. "And above all the Miraculous Medal" (- original Program or Charter of the MI).

Would I get bonus graces by owning two or three medals? One would be ill-prepared for a real gunfight by walking around with a gun that has only one bullet, after all.

I don't think the effects stack. It's like eating the shroom in super mario brothers twice; it doesn't do anything the second time.

Darn, and I just put in an order for 100. I'm going to be like a rapper, but with medals instead of more worldly bling.

« Last Edit: March 13, 2012, 07:08:30 PM by Cavaradossi »

Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

In the words [of Fr. Sergius Bulgakov], when the Holy Spirit came to dwell in the Virgin Mary, she acquired "a dyadic life, human and divine; that is, She was completely deified, because in Her hypostatic being was manifest the living, creative revelation of the Holy Spirit" (Archpriest Sergei Bulgakov, The Unburnt Bush, 1927, p. 154). "She is a perfect manifestation of the Third Hypostasis" (Ibid., p. 175), "a creature, but also no longer a creature" (P. 19 1)...

So is this why Fr. Bulgakov's name generally makes people around here uneasy at best? Makes sense...

Logged

"Some have such command of their bowels, that they can break wind continuously at pleasure, so as to produce the effect of singing."- St. Augustine of Hippo

At various times and in various trials the most Blessed Virgin Mary has come to the aid of her children, giving them different ways of attaining salvation more easily, and freeing others from the yoke of satan. Now in this epoch of the Immaculate Conception the most Blessed Virgin has given mankind the "Miraculous Medal". Its heavenly origin has been proven by countless miracles of healing and particularly of conversion. The Immaculata herself in revealing it promised all who would wear it very many graces; and since conversion and sanctification are divine graces from God, the Miraculous Medal will be one of the best means for attaining these gifts. For this reason it constitutes a first-class weapon of the Militia Immaculatae; it is a "bullet" which a faithful Knight of the Immaculata aims at the enemy, i.e., evil, thereby saving persons caught in evil. "And above all the Miraculous Medal" (- original Program or Charter of the MI).

Would I get bonus graces by owning two or three medals? One would be ill-prepared for a real gunfight by walking around with a gun that has only one bullet, after all.

Actually, Mario Bros aside, I don't think there's any reason for a knight to have only one medal (bullet). As I recall, the idea would be to have many, so you're prepared when you meet someone new that you want to save.

At various times and in various trials the most Blessed Virgin Mary has come to the aid of her children, giving them different ways of attaining salvation more easily, and freeing others from the yoke of satan. Now in this epoch of the Immaculate Conception the most Blessed Virgin has given mankind the "Miraculous Medal". Its heavenly origin has been proven by countless miracles of healing and particularly of conversion. The Immaculata herself in revealing it promised all who would wear it very many graces; and since conversion and sanctification are divine graces from God, the Miraculous Medal will be one of the best means for attaining these gifts. For this reason it constitutes a first-class weapon of the Militia Immaculatae; it is a "bullet" which a faithful Knight of the Immaculata aims at the enemy, i.e., evil, thereby saving persons caught in evil. "And above all the Miraculous Medal" (- original Program or Charter of the MI).

Would I get bonus graces by owning two or three medals? One would be ill-prepared for a real gunfight by walking around with a gun that has only one bullet, after all.

I don't think the effects stack. It's like eating the shroom in super mario brothers twice; it doesn't do anything the second time.

Darn, and I just put in an order for 100. I'm going to be like a rapper, but with medals instead of more worldly bling.